Christian censorship: Atheist billboard taken down

[quip]

If you really want to split hairs TH could theoretically mean it's especially tasteless around Christmastime. Although a case could be made for Easter, too, or if the billboards were (somehow) only visible on Sundays, for that matter.

Much ado about nothing from people used to getting their way for a very long time.

So, it's only slightly tasteless during Halloween? lain:

 

[resodko]

So, it's only slightly tasteless during Halloween? lain:

what if Halloween falls on a sunday? :think:

 

[quip]

what if Halloween falls on a sunday? :think:

The sky will fall! :jawdrop:

 

[Town Heretic]

And yet if people taking offense is your metric,

But that's not what I said was the objection to the billboard. Don't conflate my comment about your finding the reaction reasonable. Different point.

So you summed the point nicely. Beyond that you gave a personal reaction and I answered that reaction.

And it seems pretty clear to me if the intent was to offend for the sake of free publicity

The intent was to draw eyes and publicity to their organization and its site. Placing the billboard that near Christmas was an entirely predictable method for doing it and doing it without looking like an obvious ploy. I did say it was clever.

then the ad-makers would have specifically chosen an inflammatory ad,

That wouldn't have been clever, wouldn't have allowed the sort of defenses, wouldn't have set the faithful in a less favorable light in debate, etc.

Yet the ad-makers chose the least offensive ad they could for the given subject matter.

So if they're smart enough to couch it in terms least likely to offend...aren't they smart enough to know what beginning the add the week of Christmas would invite?

Of course they are. Of course they did.

 

[Granite]

TH, what's your bloody point, anyway? That they riled feathers and provoked? That they went out of their way to get attention? That you found it in poor taste? That atheists have the presumption to try to fly their flag even around the holidays?

Due respect but at this point who the heck cares?

Billboards and cakes--the new priorities for Christendom. You guys have come an awfully long way.

 

[quip]

That wouldn't have been clever, wouldn't have allowed the sort of defenses, wouldn't have set the faithful in a less favorable light in debate, etc.

No more than a Lutheran themed Christmas-timed billboard would herald Catholicism in less than favorable light.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

That wouldn't have been clever, wouldn't have allowed the sort of defenses, wouldn't have set the faithful in a less favorable light in debate, etc.

This is conjecture on your part. What this really seems to boil down to is that you presume nefarious intent.

So if they're smart enough to couch it in terms least likely to offend...aren't they smart enough to know what beginning the add the week of Christmas would invite?


Of course they are. Of course they did.

So they expected that you would expect that? :think:

Hmm...unless they also expected that you would know that they expected that.

U_eZmEiyTo0

 

[Town Heretic]

This is conjecture on your part.

Of course. That's all any of us are setting out beyond the bare facts.

What this really seems to boil down to is that you presume nefarious intent.

Nefarious is a bit down the road from being in poor taste.

So they expected that you would expect that? :think:

They're either capable of consideration or they aren't. I'm crediting them with being that, however exercised.

More a, "We've got this site/notion/context we want out there and what better way to get it than..."

Hmm...unless they also expected that you would know that they expected that.

More of a Python/Inquisition guy myself. Can't stand Princess Bride. It's the hero. Makes me root for the opposition.

 

[Town Heretic]

No more than a Lutheran themed Christmas-timed billboard would herald Catholicism in less than favorable light.

Nah, that doesn't really parallel. It boils down to whether or not you believe they set it out a week before Christmas to:

a) maximize the potential for publicity (my position); or
b) because they were concerned for atheists over a religious holiday and badly misused the remaining three weeks (most of the opposition here); or
c) set up their billboard to run during a month for no particular reason beyond the stated (fly).

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

No, see everyone, posting an inoffensive ad is tasteless because they expected that the inoffensive ad would still offend thus making the sort of Christians that would be offended by such a thing look bad.

Thus having an inoffensive ad was merely an underhanded way of offending. :dizzy:

Those sneaky atheists! :sibbie:

It couldn't be clearer at this point, Town, that you are being pretty unreasonable, and I don't take you to be an unreasonable person.

 

[PureX]

It couldn't be clearer at this point, Town, that you are being pretty unreasonable, and I don't take you to be an unreasonable person.

Actually, if you dig down a little ways ...

 

[quip]

Nah, that doesn't really parallel. It boils down to whether or not you believe they set it out a week before Christmas to:

a) maximize the potential for publicity (my position); or
b) because they were concerned for atheists over a religious holiday and badly misused the remaining three weeks (most of the opposition here); or
c) set up their billboard to run during a month for no particular reason beyond the stated (fly).

"a" (your position, incidentally) seems to parallel my prior statement quite well. The only difference being the ontological conclusion the atheist billboard draws. If anyone is to take offense...it should be atheist's in regard to the Christian response...but hey, that's just par for the normative course.

 

[Town Heretic]

No, see everyone, posting an inoffensive ad is tasteless because they expected that the inoffensive ad would still offend thus making the sort of Christians that would be offended by such a thing look bad.

Having an inoffensive ad was merely an underhanded way of offending. Don't you see, it is so obvious! :dizzy:

But it's your slight of hand with the because and not the purposely muddled language that makes that attempt wrong headed and the satire misfire.

The offense doesn't rest in the inoffensive, it rests in placing a message contrary to faith at one of the two least appropriate times in the calendar year, which is why I answered with my bridal party parallel. Beyond that, the notion/argument was, "If you're going to offend why not go all out?" and the answer is, because offending isn't the point to begin with, it's simply a means to an end. The billboard itself serves the end. The timing trades on the sensitivity of the season to garner free publicity.

It couldn't be clearer at this point, Town, that you are being pretty unreasonable,

Only were I saying what you attempted to place in my mouth instead of what I actually did, supra.

and I don't take you to be an unreasonable person.

Thanks. Likewise. But I'm not being unreasonable...or even that put out. I'm simply holding ground with good reason.

 

[Town Heretic]

"a" (your position, incidentally) seems to parallel my prior statement quite well. The only difference being the ontological conclusion the atheist billboard draws. If anyone is to take offense...it should be atheist's in regard to the Christian response...but hey, that's just par for the normative course.

Your missing the same point DS is. See my last on it. It's a fairly explicit and oft repeated complaint that for some reason keeps escaping people.

 

[Granite]

Your point pretty much seems to consist of wagging your finger, cluck-clucking, and saying "Shouldn't have done that."

Christianity: Opponent of Baked Goods and Billboards. You go, guys, you really go.:yawn:

 

[Town Heretic]

Your point pretty much seems to consist of wagging your finger, cluck-clucking, and saying "Shouldn't have done that."

No, they're atheists. It makes sense. My part is in pointing out it's in poor taste.

Christianity: Opponent of Baked Goods and Billboards. You go, guys, you really go.:yawn:

Atheists, fighting every valuation but their own.

 

[Daedalean's_Sun]

But it's your slight of hand with the because and not the purposely muddled language that makes that attempt wrong headed and the satire misfire.

As the subject of said satire, you would certainly say that.

The offense doesn't rest in the inoffensive, it rests in placing a message contrary to faith at one of the two least appropriate times in the calendar year

The message wasn't 'contrary to faith', the message was directed at people who lack faith. There is a difference. Though I think this speaks to the very point. The mere existence of atheists, or of atheism is seen as an attack on faith. I think think this thread shows nothing if not that. No one is entitled to special treatment simply for being a majority.

Beyond that, the notion/argument was, "If you're going to offend why not go all out?" and the answer is, because offending isn't the point to begin with, it's simply a means to an end.

The end, per your previous argument was more publicity. So either you are or are not arguing offense generates more publicity, you cannot have it both ways.

Thanks. Likewise. But I'm not being unreasonable.

Said every unreasonable person ever.

 

[genuineoriginal]

Placing the billboard that near Christmas was an entirely predictable method for doing it and doing it without looking like an obvious ploy. I did say it was clever.

That was my point, but the Atheists and other non-Christians on this thread are claiming that they are not clever enough to see it.

 

[Granite]

No, they're atheists. It makes sense. My part is in pointing out it's in poor taste.

Taste is in the eye of the beholder. A chuckle or shrug wouldn't have surprised me; getting your bluenose bent out of joint does. Grow up, why don't ya. I half-expect someone to start rending their clothes and pleading for someone to think of the children. This is asinine in the extreme.

A Christian wants me to be concerned with something that offends his taste just because it's Christmastime? That is so, so, so very rich.

 

[resodko]

They're either capable of consideration or they aren't.

what sort of a retard would expect atheists to be considerate of Christians? :freak:

I'm simply holding ground with good reason.

dude, you're totally awesome! :first:

Taste is in the eye of the beholder. A chuckle or shrug wouldn't have surprised me; getting your bluenose bent out of joint does. Grow up, why don't ya. I half-expect someone to start rending their clothes and pleading for someone to think of the children. This is asinine in the extreme.

A Christian wants me to be concerned with something that offends his taste just because it's Christmastime? That is so, so, so very rich.

that doesn't seem very considerate of you

but i don't expect anything else :idunno:


'cause i'm not retarded! :banana: